Canadiens should contact Jacques Lemaire about coaching job

Montreal Canadiens should contact Jacques Lemaire about coaching job

MONTREAL — Last week, a pretty good basketball writer named Adrian Wojnarowski wrote a piece about how the New York Knicks should go after Phil Jackson.

Yes, Jackson is retired as a coach. But he would come out of retirement, Wojnarowski suggested, for the kind of money James Dolan and Madison Square Garden can afford: Something along the lines of $40 million US for three years.

I’m not sure that even Jackson can make it work in New York, where Carmelo Anthony reigns as perhaps the league’s most selfish player — but if anyone can pull it all together for the Knicks, it’s Jackson.

The same goes for another retired coach who might be coaxed out of retirement if the price is right. Last week, I heard that at least one current NHL executive believes Jacques Lemaire could be persuaded to coach the Montreal Canadiens with the right package. At first, I thought he was kidding. But the more I thought about it, the better it sounded.

Related

If team owner Geoff Molson hasn’t already contacted Lemaire about coaching the Canadiens, he should. Lemaire hasn’t been on anyone’s list, because everyone assumes that a) he’s retired and b) even if he coached again, it wouldn’t be in Montreal.

But money talks, and when it comes to hiring coaches, there’s no salary cap.

Phil Jackson money would be ridiculous in the NHL — but Jacques Lemaire is surely worth at least half as much as Scott Gomez.

What is the going rate for a superb NHL coach? Right now, Detroit’s Mike Babcock is believed to be the highest-paid coach in the league at about $2 million a season.

So what do you want? Would Lemaire go back behind the bench for that much or a little more, over three seasons? Only one way to find out, right?

As for the cost to the Canadiens, one modest playoff run would more than cover the entire cost of the contract. Why would Molson and general manager Marc Bergevin want to consider Lemaire? Because (with the possible exception of Ken Hitchcock) he’s the smartest coach in the NHL.

And because if Lemaire decided to throw his hat into the ring, there’s no coach in the running who can touch him in sheer coaching ability, and that includes Vancouver’s Alain Vigneault.

There’s a reason Lemaire worked with New Jersey Devils general manager Lou Lamoriello all those years. I consider Lamoriello the smartest GM in the league. Lemaire was a coach smart enough for Lamoriello.

Smarts aren’t everything: Jean Perron has a Stanley Cup ring, after all. But smart gives you a chance. Smart can produce a quick turnaround for a mediocre team. (See Hitchcock in St. Louis.) Smart builds a system that endures long after the coach who put it together has left: it’s happened here twice, with Lemaire and Pat Burns.

When Lemaire was working as a consultant for the Habs, I sat with him and watched an entire practice at the Bell Centre. I had been led to believe that Lemaire would be taciturn, arrogant, uncommunicative. Instead, I found Lemaire to be a soft-spoken, down-to-earth guy with a dry wit, a man who loved to talk hockey — and who understood it as few others have. It was a privilege simply to sit with him and to hear the little things he picked up on as he watched practice.

Nor is Lemaire long removed from the game. Look what he accomplished last season, stepping into an almost impossible situation in New Jersey and almost taking the Devils to the playoffs — then handing a very well-schooled team off to Peter DeBoer (who may have been on the list of coaches Pierre Gauthier wanted for the Canadiens.)

Look back over the coaching history in the NHL and there are very few names who can match Lemaire for sheer brilliance. (And please don’t say Punch Imlach.) Men like Toe Blake and Scotty Bowman, obviously. Fred Shero. Harry Sinden. Hitchcock. Maybe Guy Boucher, although it’s hard to be innovative without a goaltender. And Lemaire.

You know you’ve accomplished something when you have the entire league copying your system, when you win repeatedly with a cast of players that was, at best, about a B-plus in terms of talent, when you have so much influence that the league adapts an entire set of rules designed to negate your system and put offence back in the game.

(With mixed results, given the current playoffs.)

Yes, Lemaire has flamed out here once before. That was the first stop in a great coaching career. He was a legendary player here, the centreman between Steve Shutt and some guy named Lafleur. Among other things, Lemaire possessed one of the hardest shots you’ve ever seen — and he is also that rarity, a great offensive player who became a great coach.

These Canadiens might be perfectly suited for a coach like Lemaire. They have a goaltender, even if Carey Price needs the occasional kick in the butt. They have some young defencemen who can play. They have one good, tough scoring line and they are about to secure a very high draft pick.

There’s one reason Molson should get on the phone and track down Lemaire: because he’s the best possible coach for this team.

There are three reasons Lemaire should come: Because he likes a challenge, because the Canadiens could pay him handsomely — and because, dagnabbit, these are the Montreal Canadiens we’re talking about. Lemaire’s old team and the greatest franchise in the history of the league.

There are a number of fine coaches the Canadiens could hire: Vigneault (if he’s free), Bob Hartley, Guy Carbonneau, possibly Patrick Roy. Assuming Scotty Bowman isn’t going to make a comeback, there’s only one great coach out there: Jacques Lemaire.

Once upon a time, that’s how the Canadiens did things — they went after the best.